I predict the numbers will increase steadily every year and it is a good thing. Here in Québec, us babyboomer and gen-x will not want to be a burden to our children, and certainly don't want to end up in a residence being spoon fed in a diaper. When the party is over, it's time to go - and we did have a good party :-)
I guess that picture is somewhat haunting. And it is a sad picture of your mother's last days. Still, I would choose that over being put to death. Call me old fashioned. I just don't see killing as the answer.
Your body, your life, your choice, of course. Everyone agrees that MAiD should never be imposed on anyone. Ever. Is that what you fear? Do you fear it will be imposed on you eventually? So, you do now whatever you can to stop it? Btw, it's more like mercy killing, and, while not "THE" answer, it still is an answer.
Loved what you wrote! But, I can't make out what you mean by better questions: "‘how many people qualify?’ and ‘how many people want it?’". Do you mean "Is the system able to meet the demand?", because the stats are saying many applicants die between MAiD application and delivery (Track 1). Or are you worried about a scenario like in The Netreelands, where the MDSUMC equivalent rejects 95% of applicants?
Demand is the key factor, and the burden of proof is on opponents to show that there's anything untoward about growing demand. The track 1 non-MAID deaths are a mixed bag. Some are due to delays that wouldn't have happened in an ideal system, but others are because people get approved and then decide not to use MAID. The same happens in Oregon.
Why the difference in rates between BC and other provinces . Why are rates so high in Canada compared to California ( 10 fold rate difference ) ? Same population size . Legalised at the same time . Outbreak of suffering ? Permissive Canadian assessors normalising MAID ?
Without taking a deep dive into the reasons, there are a couple significant differences between MAiD in Canada and California that may effect the variance in numbers. California requires the individual to have a prognosis of "6 months or less" and they must "self administer" the medications. In Canada, those under Track 1 must have a "reasonably foreseeable death" but it doesn't explicitly state prognostic timeline which allows those with a prognosis of 7,8,9 months, etc to potentially access MAiD. In addition, Canada has both oral & IV route, ensuring those without the ability to self-administer (i.e. those with altered ability to hold a cup or who are unable to swallow safely) can still access MAiD if found eligible. There are so many other elements to consider in Canada vs USA, such as individual's knowledge about their EOL options where they live, practitioners comfort in talking about assisted death with their patients/clients, availability of someone to assess for eligibility, etc.
I've read Victoria, BC was the world capital of MAiD, surpassing European cities, who have been doing it for longer... It's not too surprising: Victoria is where rich old Canadians come to retire. Like with gay rights (Egan&Nesbit, Guèvremont, Akerstrom, Little Sister's vs Big Brother), important court decisions came from BC: Sue Rodriguez (lost by 1 voice, if my memory is correct). The Carter Case. And Joseph Arvay.
In comparing with US, how can we factor in the different health care systems? Insurance, accessibility, etc...
MAID is different indeed. As you are a philosopher, you are skilled in debate. How would you argue against your position on MAID from.a purely logical and ethical perspective?
You are correct that those of us who find the high number of MAID deaths disturbing have an a priori belief in the sanctity of human life and that MAID is not a fundamental good. But your a priori belief that MAID is a fundamental good also colours your views. You seem to draw logical parallels between the number of heart attacks, which we assume to agree is a fundamental bad, with the number of MAID procedures, which we do not agree on as to it being a good or a bad. Your logic is flawed. Your arguments are not free and open but rather all used to buttress your belief. So how can you draw a proper ethical conclusion?
There are objections to assisted dying and I want to hear them. My point in this article is that pointing to the number of assisted deaths isn't an argument against MAID any more than it's an argument for it. Since nearly everyone agrees that heart attacks are bad, we don't need an argument to see this. MAID is different.
The only objection that bothers me is from Health Justice about "deemed consent". The BC Mental Health Act imposed "deemed consent" on involuntary mental health patients. If my memory is good, the act removes psychiatric treatment decision power from the patient. But, according to Health Justice, all medical decisions are taken away. Recommendation 8 or 9 of some expert panel, makes a big deal of the 6 months 'detention' mark, and about when to do the assessment, and who does it, and whether they work for the institution... I don't recall anything about "diminished capacity" as in "Limited capacity", limited by other humans, not intrinsically. Sharing with a friend, we were unable to imagine what doom-scenarios the recommendation writers had in mind to prevent. But, if someone's only health-related choice is yes or no to MAiD, I'm starting to have a problem. Yet, I would gladly and thankfully choose MAiD for myself.
Of all the anti-MAiD letters to the government I've read, this one puzzled me. I asked DWDC, but so far no answer. My personal paranoid fantasy is that DWDC is not too warm on the MDSUMC. They are suicidist (I agree with Alexandre Baril said in his book "Undoing Suicidism"), they don't use the terms "disorder" and "illness" in a consistent manner, even preferring the latter...
This isn't true of DWDC. Their website lists MDSUMC as one of their current priorities and they're doing active advocacy work on it. It's true, however, that they aren't Barilian (Barilean?).
Barilian! That's funny. My brain wanted to read Brazillian.
Of course, you are right. To add to your points, DWDC are launching that important legal challenge against the federal government's constant postponement of MDSUMC. And they are posting my story: Andrés Story. As I said, it is more of a "paranoiac" idea in my defective brain. I got it mainly from this paragraph Helen Long, CEO of DWDC, wrote in her November 9, 2023 general email:
"We know that, for some, this is a challenging element of MAID to think about. I’d like to clarify that simply having a mental disorder will not make one eligible for MAID. This change in the law will not include those who are in crisis or experiencing suicidal ideation, but, instead, a very limited number of people who have found no relief from their grievous and irremediable suffering, endured over many years or even decades, and who want to exercise their right to choice. In the Netherlands, where assisted dying for mental disorders has been available for 20 years, only 1% of assisted deaths have been approved for those suffering from a mental disorder."
I read a 5% approval rate, but that's a detail. I detected a fear and an attempt to appease the general public. That may be just what a good advocate does. I wouldn't know: I failed miserably in my efforts toward gay rights, so, I'm not one to judge. But again, I'm not quite sane, and English is not my first language (but that could be a cop-out, too...). Thanks for your time and attention.... and brain power...
Please, demonstrate the "sanctity" of life... It's a personal belief, to be kept to yourself, not imposed on others, to limit their options.
Whether MAiD is good or bad should be every Canadian's personal decision. Like abortion, society cannot judge for it's citizens. Society should just offer as many choices as possible. It's up to the individual to choose, especially in those areas that are so personal.
I predict the numbers will increase steadily every year and it is a good thing. Here in Québec, us babyboomer and gen-x will not want to be a burden to our children, and certainly don't want to end up in a residence being spoon fed in a diaper. When the party is over, it's time to go - and we did have a good party :-)
My goodness! Having had such a good party it can only go downhill from here. I'm sorry you can't embrace all of life.
Don't be silly - I saw my mom spoonfed in diaper and she sure wasn't embracing that part of her life.
I guess that picture is somewhat haunting. And it is a sad picture of your mother's last days. Still, I would choose that over being put to death. Call me old fashioned. I just don't see killing as the answer.
Hi Old Fashioned,
Your body, your life, your choice, of course. Everyone agrees that MAiD should never be imposed on anyone. Ever. Is that what you fear? Do you fear it will be imposed on you eventually? So, you do now whatever you can to stop it? Btw, it's more like mercy killing, and, while not "THE" answer, it still is an answer.
Bye. MDMW
Loved what you wrote! But, I can't make out what you mean by better questions: "‘how many people qualify?’ and ‘how many people want it?’". Do you mean "Is the system able to meet the demand?", because the stats are saying many applicants die between MAiD application and delivery (Track 1). Or are you worried about a scenario like in The Netreelands, where the MDSUMC equivalent rejects 95% of applicants?
MDMW
Demand is the key factor, and the burden of proof is on opponents to show that there's anything untoward about growing demand. The track 1 non-MAID deaths are a mixed bag. Some are due to delays that wouldn't have happened in an ideal system, but others are because people get approved and then decide not to use MAID. The same happens in Oregon.
Why the difference in rates between BC and other provinces . Why are rates so high in Canada compared to California ( 10 fold rate difference ) ? Same population size . Legalised at the same time . Outbreak of suffering ? Permissive Canadian assessors normalising MAID ?
Without taking a deep dive into the reasons, there are a couple significant differences between MAiD in Canada and California that may effect the variance in numbers. California requires the individual to have a prognosis of "6 months or less" and they must "self administer" the medications. In Canada, those under Track 1 must have a "reasonably foreseeable death" but it doesn't explicitly state prognostic timeline which allows those with a prognosis of 7,8,9 months, etc to potentially access MAiD. In addition, Canada has both oral & IV route, ensuring those without the ability to self-administer (i.e. those with altered ability to hold a cup or who are unable to swallow safely) can still access MAiD if found eligible. There are so many other elements to consider in Canada vs USA, such as individual's knowledge about their EOL options where they live, practitioners comfort in talking about assisted death with their patients/clients, availability of someone to assess for eligibility, etc.
I've read Victoria, BC was the world capital of MAiD, surpassing European cities, who have been doing it for longer... It's not too surprising: Victoria is where rich old Canadians come to retire. Like with gay rights (Egan&Nesbit, Guèvremont, Akerstrom, Little Sister's vs Big Brother), important court decisions came from BC: Sue Rodriguez (lost by 1 voice, if my memory is correct). The Carter Case. And Joseph Arvay.
In comparing with US, how can we factor in the different health care systems? Insurance, accessibility, etc...
MDMW
MAID is different indeed. As you are a philosopher, you are skilled in debate. How would you argue against your position on MAID from.a purely logical and ethical perspective?
You are correct that those of us who find the high number of MAID deaths disturbing have an a priori belief in the sanctity of human life and that MAID is not a fundamental good. But your a priori belief that MAID is a fundamental good also colours your views. You seem to draw logical parallels between the number of heart attacks, which we assume to agree is a fundamental bad, with the number of MAID procedures, which we do not agree on as to it being a good or a bad. Your logic is flawed. Your arguments are not free and open but rather all used to buttress your belief. So how can you draw a proper ethical conclusion?
There are objections to assisted dying and I want to hear them. My point in this article is that pointing to the number of assisted deaths isn't an argument against MAID any more than it's an argument for it. Since nearly everyone agrees that heart attacks are bad, we don't need an argument to see this. MAID is different.
The only objection that bothers me is from Health Justice about "deemed consent". The BC Mental Health Act imposed "deemed consent" on involuntary mental health patients. If my memory is good, the act removes psychiatric treatment decision power from the patient. But, according to Health Justice, all medical decisions are taken away. Recommendation 8 or 9 of some expert panel, makes a big deal of the 6 months 'detention' mark, and about when to do the assessment, and who does it, and whether they work for the institution... I don't recall anything about "diminished capacity" as in "Limited capacity", limited by other humans, not intrinsically. Sharing with a friend, we were unable to imagine what doom-scenarios the recommendation writers had in mind to prevent. But, if someone's only health-related choice is yes or no to MAiD, I'm starting to have a problem. Yet, I would gladly and thankfully choose MAiD for myself.
Of all the anti-MAiD letters to the government I've read, this one puzzled me. I asked DWDC, but so far no answer. My personal paranoid fantasy is that DWDC is not too warm on the MDSUMC. They are suicidist (I agree with Alexandre Baril said in his book "Undoing Suicidism"), they don't use the terms "disorder" and "illness" in a consistent manner, even preferring the latter...
MDMW
This isn't true of DWDC. Their website lists MDSUMC as one of their current priorities and they're doing active advocacy work on it. It's true, however, that they aren't Barilian (Barilean?).
Barilian! That's funny. My brain wanted to read Brazillian.
Of course, you are right. To add to your points, DWDC are launching that important legal challenge against the federal government's constant postponement of MDSUMC. And they are posting my story: Andrés Story. As I said, it is more of a "paranoiac" idea in my defective brain. I got it mainly from this paragraph Helen Long, CEO of DWDC, wrote in her November 9, 2023 general email:
"We know that, for some, this is a challenging element of MAID to think about. I’d like to clarify that simply having a mental disorder will not make one eligible for MAID. This change in the law will not include those who are in crisis or experiencing suicidal ideation, but, instead, a very limited number of people who have found no relief from their grievous and irremediable suffering, endured over many years or even decades, and who want to exercise their right to choice. In the Netherlands, where assisted dying for mental disorders has been available for 20 years, only 1% of assisted deaths have been approved for those suffering from a mental disorder."
I read a 5% approval rate, but that's a detail. I detected a fear and an attempt to appease the general public. That may be just what a good advocate does. I wouldn't know: I failed miserably in my efforts toward gay rights, so, I'm not one to judge. But again, I'm not quite sane, and English is not my first language (but that could be a cop-out, too...). Thanks for your time and attention.... and brain power...
MDMW
André
Please, demonstrate the "sanctity" of life... It's a personal belief, to be kept to yourself, not imposed on others, to limit their options.
Whether MAiD is good or bad should be every Canadian's personal decision. Like abortion, society cannot judge for it's citizens. Society should just offer as many choices as possible. It's up to the individual to choose, especially in those areas that are so personal.
MDMW